H
HONG LEONG BANK BERHAD
Organisation 12 cases
About HONG LEONG BANK BERHAD
HONG LEONG BANK BERHAD appears as a party in 12 judgments in the MY Case Law database, spanning April 2022 to January 2026. HONG LEONG BANK BERHAD appeared as respondent in 3 cases, aggrieved party in 2 cases, defendant in 2 cases. Cases span the High Court (10), Court of Appeal (2).
Case areas include Section 340 of the National Land Code 1965 (NLC) (1 cases), Investigation of an alleged customs duties evasion of one TS Steel Sdn Bhd(TS Steel) (1 cases), Company law (1 cases).
How many court cases involve HONG LEONG BANK BERHAD?
HONG LEONG BANK BERHAD appears in 12 published judgments from April 2022 to January 2026. Most commonly as respondent (3 cases).
In which Malaysian courts has HONG LEONG BANK BERHAD appeared?
HONG LEONG BANK BERHAD has appeared across High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) (10 cases) and Court of Appeal (Mahkamah Rayuan) (2 cases), totaling 12 judgments.
Practice Areas
This is an assessment of damages against the 1st and 2nd defendants arising out the decision of the High Court in allowing the plaintiffs’ claim and as varied by the Court of Appeal. 1 Summary judgment 1 The Defendant filed two applications via Enclosure 24, for summary judgment of the counterclaim to be recorded pursuant to O14 Rule 5 of the Rules of Court 2012 (ROC) and Enclosure 26, to strike out the Plaintiffs’ claim in accordance with Order 18 Rule 19 of the ROC. Both applications were allowed with a cost of RM5000 each to the Defendant, subject to the allocator. Plaintiff’s claim is struck out, and the Defendant’s counterclaim is summarily recorded as prayed for. 1 Summons for directions-the entitlement of the secured creditors to claim interest after the making of the winding-up order- whether the sum received from the Government of Malaysia forms part of the secured assets of the Financiers or is available to the general estate- whether, by operation of section 524(3)(b) CA 2016 read with section 8(2A) of the Insolvency Act 1967 (“IA 1967”) and section 4 of the Civil Law Act 1956 (“CLA 1956”), the Financiers are entitled to interest accruing after 29 August 2018- whether the Judgment Sum is subject to the security interests of the Financiers or forms part of the unencumbered assets of the Company-Section 524(3)(b) CA 2016, read together with section 8(2A) IA 1967, provides that a secured creditor who does not realise its security within the stipulated period is not entitled to interest accruing after the winding-up order- the provision does not confer a discretion on the Court-it imposes a statutory consequence- winding-up order therefore remained effective in law from 29 August 2018, notwithstanding the stay orders- It is unnecessary to determine whether there was any temporal gap between the various stay orders-even if the stays were continuous, they do not affect the operative date of the winding-up order for the purposes of section 524(3)(b)- The Financiers did not realise their security within the statutory period. Accordingly, by operation of section 524(3)(b) CA 2016 read with section 8(2A) IA 1967 and section 4 CLA 1956, interest ceased to accrue thereafter- the Judgment Sum became part of the credit balance of an assigned Project Account and therefore forms part of the secured assets of the Financiers- The Syndicated Financiers and Bank Pembangunan Malaysia Berhad, whether in its capacity as a Syndicated Financier or as Government Support Loan Financier, are not entitled to interest accruing after 29 August 2018.-the Liquidator is directed to take an account of any post-winding-up interest charged or retained after that date and to make the necessary adjustments in accordance with law-the judgment sum forms part of the secured assets subject to the security interests of the Syndicated Financiers. 1 The Applicant is a Judgment Creditor, having secured a judgment against the Respondent in 2023, thereby rendering the Defendant a Judgment Debtor. To enforce the said judgment, the Judgment Creditor initiated garnishee proceedings against the Judgment Debtor’s accounts in 18 banks, pursuant to Order 49 of the Rules of Court 2012. However, these efforts proved futile when the High Court at Shah Alam, in Suit BA-37G-104-07/2024 (“Suit 104”), declined to grant the garnishee order absolute sought by the Plaintiff. The present dispute specifically concerns the Judgment Creditor and the Sixth Garnishee. Having successfully resisted the Judgment Creditor’s application for a garnishee order absolute before the Shah Alam High Court in Suit 104, the Sixth Garnishee now faces a fresh challenge 1 CIVIL PROCEDURE: Appeal against decision of the SAR- stay of the garnishee proceedings- Interim Maintenance Order- Variation Application at the Family Court- relevant test for a stay of proceedings- any special circumstances- rare and compelling circumstances-Child’s welfare is off paramount importance-possibility of duplicity of action leading to unnecessary possibility of differing judgments by High Courts of concurrent jurisdiction- withdrawing funds at present might interfere with future variation arrangements. 1 Section 340 of the National Land Code 1965 (NLC) 1 Investigation of an alleged customs duties evasion of one TS Steel Sdn Bhd(TS Steel) 1
Aggrieved Party (2)
ba-28pw-191-07-2024 MYHC
Dato’ Gan Ah Tee Likuidasi untuk Lingkaran Luar Butterworth (Penang) Sdn Bhd (Dalam Likuidasi) PENCELAH IJM CONSTRUCTION SDN BHD PIHAK TERKILAN 1. ) Bank Kerjasama Rakyat Malaysia Berhad 2. ) Bank Pembangunan Malaysia Berhad 3. ) CIMB Bank Berhad 4. ) Hong Leong Bank Berhad
8 January 2026
wa-28pw-269-06-2025 MYHC
Orix Leasing Malaysia Berhad PIHAK TERKILAN 1. ) MFT RESOURCES SDN BHD 2. ) HONG LEONG BANK BERHAD 3. ) Kerajaan Malaysia v BATU KEMAS INDUSTRI SDN BHD
23 November 2025
Garnishee (2)
ba-37g-9-01-2025 MYHC
KANYAWEE ANEKTHANABOON v LEONG WEI PIN PIHAK YANG DIGARNIS 1. ) CIMB Bank Berhad 2. ) Public Bank Berhad 3. ) Malayan Banking Berhad 4. ) Hong Leong Bank Berhad 5. ) United Overseas Bank (Malaysia) Berhad 6. ) RHB Bank Berhad
30 November 2025
ba-37g-104-07-2024 MYHC
SENG SAN BING v PETER CHARLES SMERLING PIHAK YANG DIGARNIS 1. ) AFFIN BANK BERHAD 2. ) ALLIANCE BANK MALAYSIA BERHAD 3. ) AMBANK (M) BERHAD 4. ) BANK OF AMERICA MALAYSIA BERHAD 5. ) BNP PARIBAS MALAYSIA BERHAD 6. ) CIMB BANK BERHAD 7. ) CIMB ISLAMIC BANK BERHAD 8. ) CITIBANK BERHAD 9. ) DEUTSCHE BANK (MALAYSIA) BERHAD 10. ) HONG LEONG BANK BERHAD 11. ) HSBC BANK MALAYSIA BERHAD 12. ) J.P. MORGAN CHASE BANK BERHAD 13. ) MALAYAN BANKING BERHAD 14. ) OCBC BANK (MALAYSIA) BERHAD 15. ) PUBLIC BANK...
13 April 2025
Intervener (2)
Respondent (3)
wa-12ancvc-110-05-2024 MYHC
SENSATION NETWORK SDN. BHD. v HONG LEONG BANK BERHAD
4 August 2025
w-01ncvcw-166-03-2023 MYCOA
TEN JING ENTERPRISE SDN BHD v 1. ) HONG LEONG BANK BERHAD 2. ) ENGKU HANIF BIN ENGKU ISMAIL 3. ) KETUA PENGARAH JABATAN KASTAM DIRAJA MALAYSIA 4. ) Kerajaan Malaysia
15 May 2025
wa-24ncc-425-09-2024 MYHC
TRENERGY INFRASTRUCTURE SDN BHD v HONG LEONG BANK BERHAD
22 April 2025
Defendant (2)
ba-22ncvc-485-11-2024 MYHC
1. ) LEE SUIT YIN 2. ) SRITHARAN NAIDU A/L SUNDARA RAJOO v HONG LEONG BANK BERHAD
22 June 2025
21ncvc-55-07-2013 MYHC
XXXX v 1. ) XXXX 2. ) NOR ISMAN BIN ISMAIL 3. ) Rizal & Hafez (didakwa sebagai firma) 4. ) Thiano Limo Holdings Sdn Bhd 5. ) HONG LEONG BANK BERHAD
24 April 2022